Omega D2
Bessler 45 MXT
Any enlarger with a long, single column like the Omegas will need to be tethered at the top. Even though my D2V had a relatively short column, I tethered the top. Ditto with the Zone VI enlarger that I have currently. In fact, Zone VI made a kit for this purpose,.
Never felt a need to attach the top column of my 45 LPL, though my 810 Devere is attached at the top. The Durst 8x10 base of the SM-183 did not require it. L
ALL enlargers ideally need to be braced with a wall attachment. I have a vertical enlarger where the baseboard alone weighs close to 400 lbs, and I still have it seriously attached to an ample wall support beam. My Durst L184 and 138's are tiny compared to that; but I have all of them firmly anchored top and bottom too. It's not all that hard to do, and should be considered standard practice except with horizontal enlargers designed to be moved on floor rails.
IMHO...very sturdy enlarger support - anchored directly to concrete basement slab, is better than wall attachment. Why? Because walls vibrate when utilities (furnace motors, etc.) kick in. I'd noticed this awhile back after having anchored my D-2V to a wall, and when the furnace started up I could see the negative grain giggling about. Again...IMHO.
Oh...and - Omega vs Beseler? Omega...hands down for personal use. Beseler in a production or educational environment. Will expand on this when I'm feeling a bit more awake.
I notice two odd things with this enlarger. Maybe most concerning is that as the head gets nearer the top, the motor starts slowing down. I also think that it is odd that to get the head to raise and lower with the motor, the condensor is on, because the unit is plugged in Do you just plug the main power cord into your timer and accept that the condensor is going to be on?
Danny
Edit: I found the "counterbalance" adjustment and now the head goes up without laboring. The only problem is that there are no viable threads in the short outer tube, but the screw catches on the inner tube when the inner tube rotates under spring pressure.
Last edited by kaiserschmarrn; 11-Nov-2020 at 05:13.
I just looked again. It is a Componon-S. The last decent lens I bought was in the early 90s, maybe. It was a Rodenstock Rodagon of something like 75-80 mm. It was all I could afford then. I look forward to getting a lens to cover 4x5 and to eventually get a view camera. It will be great to use one again.
Danny
1. No. Digital photography has won the photography ball game.
2. I used Omega D2 in high school and college. Extra curricular activity. For my analog darkroom I have an Omega B-22 and it covers all of what I want to do with film photography. I bought a Chromega head decades ago that I now use with VC paper. I just dial in the contrast I want. The B-22 works with my medium format negatives.
Last post reminded me of the first question. A point to consider regarding "getting set up" with digital vs analog, is that of relative expense. These days, it is quite possible, in the realm of analog, to embrace the "state of the art" for just a few hundred dollars - while to do the same with digital, well...it is quite possible that you would need to sell your house!
Another consideration - reflecting on the "ball game" analogy mentioned above, is that the digital "ball" is still very much in play...with its "state of the art" constantly evolving. On one hand this is very exciting. On the other hand, well...good luck with ever moving back into that house!
Tin Can
Bookmarks